When comparing the evolution in market share of Linux and OpenBSD, two operating systems that were born around the same time, a question comes to mind: why is there such a difference in market penetration? Linux, on one side of the spectrum, with a license that supposedly impairs commercial venues, has enticed companies and organizations to adopt and support it under varying commercial models, while the BSD derivatives (FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD), with a larger history and an allegedly more commercial friendly license haven't been as successful to gather a large installed base and widespread adoption.

The difference in market share between Linux and OpenBSD isn't a license issue, it's a focus issue. Linux distributions are aimed at a wide range of tasks from sering up web pages, being an easy to use desktop, to embedded devices. Chances are if there is a niche, a Linux developer will try to fill it. OpenBSD has a much tighter focus: creating secure code. OpenBSD doesn't try to be friendly or fast or do anything really except be a secure UNIX OS. Since most of the BSD and Linux projects out there are already relatively secure, OpenBSD only appeals to people who are above and beyond the normal paranoid level.